why would you need an "engineer" to fit a dish on a wall and run a cable to a STB.
think you have a misunderstanding to what an "engineer" actually is.
these are guys are installers, and this is the correct term to use.
I agree with what you are saying, but Sky do refer to them as "engineers". When you get sky installed, or multiroom etc they book an "engineer" not an "installer".
these are guys are installers, and this is the correct term to use.
I would 100% agree, although it really has no bearing on this thread, as a lazy 'engineer' wouldn't bother wiring the phone connection, just as a lazy 'installer' doesn't.
I've thought about it. House 3 has multiroom installed in 3 rooms all using wi fi for verification. Later 2 boxes moved to houses 1 and 5 either side still using house 3 wi fi for verification.
Why would that not work?
and how does the current method stop that from happening?
you can simply run a long telephone cable to the houses either side.
I've thought about it. House 3 has multiroom installed in 3 rooms all using wi fi for verification. Later 2 boxes moved to houses 1 and 5 either side still using house 3 wi fi for verification.
Why would that not work?
But it's in no way different to running extension phone cables to next door to do exactly the same thing - and is something that's been fairly common over the years.
The verification isn't particularly for 'next door', but further away, where WiFi wouldn't work anyway. Assuming of course the suggested network verification works via WiFi at all, and not just via Ethernet?. Certainly Sky have gone to a fair amount of effort training their installers to run Ethernet cables.
Assuming of course the suggested network verification works via WiFi at all, and not just via Ethernet?.
But there is no way the SKY box would know whether the connection used WIFI or not. It could know that WIFI was involved if an internal WIFI connection was involved but not if the ethernet cable connected to a wireless bridge etc.
If network verification was allowed it would be relatively simple to use a VPN to make it seem that the multiroom box was on the same network rather than in Spain etc.
Very easy to do a share deal with friends and family and not terribly difficult to scale up to a black market scam.
Easy enough to design a better network authorisation model but that would need a new solution from scratch which wouldn't be compatible with the present one.
There will come a time when SKY have no alternative but to redesign the whole platform .............
Assuming of course the suggested network verification works via WiFi at all, and not just via Ethernet?. Certainly Sky have gone to a fair amount of effort training their installers to run Ethernet cables.
In my opinion, having network verification for multiroom solves 2 current problems with the phone line system:
1. Some people (like me) don't necessarily need or want to have a landline phone line. Having a phone line and paying for line rental just to have multiroom is a bloody expensive way of having another SKy box in the bedroom!
2. People don't want to run cables all around their house to connect boxes to phone lines. Yes, I understand there are wireless solutions, but most people don't see that. They see, "connect box to phone line? But sure my phone line is in X room and I want my box in Y room."
Insisting on Ethernet cable only solves one of those problems (the not having a phone line one, obviously) so IMO, I would find it quite odd if they insisted on it. That said, nothing to stop you going down the wireless bridge route and bluffing a wired connection.
But there is no way the SKY box would know whether the connection used WIFI or not. It could know that WIFI was involved if an internal WIFI connection was involved but not if the ethernet cable connected to a wireless bridge etc.
If network verification was allowed it would be relatively simple to use a VPN to make it seem that the multiroom box was on the same network rather than in Spain etc.
Very easy to do a share deal with friends and family and not terribly difficult to scale up to a black market scam.
Easy enough to design a better network authorisation model but that would need a new solution from scratch which wouldn't be compatible with the present one.
There will come a time when SKY have no alternative but to redesign the whole platform .............
I would personally use some form of USB key that plugs into the back of all the boxes, that talk to each other directly, and not through the normal network (so they have to be close enough to each other, ie, in the same house), and use some form of encryption so that the signal cannot be stolen and spoofed etc.
But there is no way the SKY box would know whether the connection used WIFI or not. It could know that WIFI was involved if an internal WIFI connection was involved but not if the ethernet cable connected to a wireless bridge etc.
You're assuming Sky will be implementing an easily hacked Network solution, which would obviously work over any network type. But I would imagine it's not likely to be as crude as that? - which is why it's not been done so far, and why it's been in development for such a long time.
You're assuming Sky will be implementing an easily hacked Network solution, which would obviously work over any network type. But I would imagine it's not likely to be as crude as that? - which is why it's not been done so far, and why it's been in development for such a long time.
A fairly simple way is for the two boxes to find the MAC address of the router (this will be known to them both anyway) and make sure they are both the same - each box tells SKY who check if they are the same or multiroom box queries master and will not work unless they are both connected to the same network (not fool proof but quite good).
A fairly simple way is for the two boxes to find the MAC address of the router (this will be known to them both anyway) and make sure they are both the same - each box tells SKY who check if they are the same or multiroom box queries master and will not work unless they are both connected to the same network (not fool proof but quite good).
Many more.....
How would this stop the sharing of an additional box/boxes?
My laptop can pick up 4-6 different networks, so I'm assuming they can pick up mine, so technically you could have multiple boxes at different addresses running of one MAC address.
At least a hard wired connection has limitations, unless 2-3 adjoining neighbours are in on the scam.
The main Sky box connected on the network could act as a server for additional boxes on a closed local network. Multiroom boxes would also be able to access central stored content via this model. A bit like the internal IT system in an office.
I would personally use some form of USB key that plugs into the back of all the boxes, that talk to each other directly, and not through the normal network (so they have to be close enough to each other, ie, in the same house), and use some form of encryption so that the signal cannot be stolen and spoofed etc.
From what I hear the system under test uses USB dongles and not the standard WiFi nor ethernet connections. This to me indicates that they are not using standard protocols, frequencies or encryption.
I live in a small block of 7 flats with a communal dish when we moved in sky had been put in to all the flats and been wired in to the living room with a wall socket.
I have ordered multi room today but they say there is a small chance it won't be able to ge done because it is a communal dish. What's the exact reason, is there a max number of feeds from one dish or something ?
Sky said they won't know till the engineer comes out
Sorry is this meant in reply to my question about multi room in flat ?
Yes, the availability of multiroom is entirely dependent on how the flats are wired, and nothing to do with Sky - only the people responsible for the distribution system can tell you if it's possible and what it might cost (usually VERY expensive, if it's even possible). A Sky installer wouldn't be allowed to touch the system.
Yes, the availability of multiroom is entirely dependent on how the flats are wired, and nothing to do with Sky - only the people responsible for the distribution system can tell you if it's possible and what it might cost (usually VERY expensive, if it's even possible). A Sky installer wouldn't be allowed to touch the system.
Why would they send someone out then I spoken to two sky agents if different occasions they did say there is a possibility it couldn't be done but nothing about sky not doing it touching expense etc.
What is the difference with a dish on a large house for example wired into many room's then them wanting it put in another room for example
Why would they send someone out then I spoken to two sky agents if different occasions they did say there is a possibility it couldn't be done but nothing about sky not doing it touching expense etc.
What is the difference with a dish on a large house for example wired into many room's then them wanting it put in another room for example
A communal system (which is what yours is) is multiple outlets connected to one dish via a distribution unit (multiswitch) whereas a domestic installation is usually up to four rooms connected direct to one dish. The communal installation has almost certainly been done by an independant SMATV installer who specialises in that sort of install and they are responsible for the whole system from the dish to the outlets in individual flats and as such Sky are not allowed to touch any part of that system but merely connect to provided outlets. If there is no cabling to other outlets or if there is cabling but it is not connected to the multiswitch then only that communal installer can provide those feeds to additional outlets. If that involves additional cabling then that may well cost a significant amount depending on whether there are spare outputs on the multiswitch and the length and difficulty in fitting cabling.
You really should consult with your landlord/management committee to find out who is responsible for your system and ask them whether there are available outlets and if not the cost of installing them - certainly nothing to do with Sky, why would Sky know how the system is installed?
Why would they send someone out then I spoken to two sky agents if different occasions they did say there is a possibility it couldn't be done but nothing about sky not doing it touching expense etc.
You've only spoken to Sky CS's, so they know about as much as the till operators in Tesco's
What is the difference with a dish on a large house for example wired into many room's then them wanting it put in another room for example
As davemurgatroyd has mentioned, they are COMPLETELY different things, and depending how it's been installed is unlikely to have any spare capacity to add more sockets (it wastes money fitting spare capacity that isn't used).
But as I mentioned previously, Sky can't touch it (and don't carry that kind of gear anyway), but it wouldn't be unusual to cost £100's to add an extra couple of sockets - it might need a considerable redesign, and extra equipment fitting, as well as existing equipment upgrading.
On the plus side, doing such an upgrade would make it easier and cheaper for others to add extra sockets
I will check to see if there is a label there tonight, however I am in two minds as a) it would be unsightly to run a tel. cable from the ground floor to the bedroom and b) why do I need my daughters box to be connected?
N.B. - the main box in lounge is connected with tel. cable
To confirm there is no label on rear of box! I am happy with installation, so have decided to leave as is and see if Sky pick this up.
I still don't get that a sky installer must have procedures to follow, and if a tel. line is mandatory, he would install - otherwise he would be out of a job, particularly if Sky monitored tel. line connections to new installs!
To confirm there is no label on rear of box! I am happy with installation, so have decided to leave as is and see if Sky pick this up.
As I suggested a LONG time back
A number of people do seem to 'fall through the net', there's always a chance you could be another.
If Sky do contact you, don't ignore it, get back to them and simply tell them the installer didn't connect the box to the phone, and that they are free to sent a competent installer out to do it properly, at your convenience, and at their cost.
I still don't get that a sky installer must have procedures to follow, and if a tel. line is mandatory, he would install - otherwise he would be out of a job, particularly if Sky monitored tel. line connections to new installs!
Sky's own installers can authorise cards via a PDA, so a lazy installer can turn both cards on in that way and save himself the time and work doing it properly.
Comments
have another think about it and come back once you've worked it out.
I agree with what you are saying, but Sky do refer to them as "engineers". When you get sky installed, or multiroom etc they book an "engineer" not an "installer".
http://help.sky.com/my-account/moving-home/moving-home-faqs#tab-2
Mike
I would 100% agree, although it really has no bearing on this thread, as a lazy 'engineer' wouldn't bother wiring the phone connection, just as a lazy 'installer' doesn't.
and how does the current method stop that from happening?
you can simply run a long telephone cable to the houses either side.
But it's in no way different to running extension phone cables to next door to do exactly the same thing - and is something that's been fairly common over the years.
The verification isn't particularly for 'next door', but further away, where WiFi wouldn't work anyway. Assuming of course the suggested network verification works via WiFi at all, and not just via Ethernet?. Certainly Sky have gone to a fair amount of effort training their installers to run Ethernet cables.
But there is no way the SKY box would know whether the connection used WIFI or not. It could know that WIFI was involved if an internal WIFI connection was involved but not if the ethernet cable connected to a wireless bridge etc.
If network verification was allowed it would be relatively simple to use a VPN to make it seem that the multiroom box was on the same network rather than in Spain etc.
Very easy to do a share deal with friends and family and not terribly difficult to scale up to a black market scam.
Easy enough to design a better network authorisation model but that would need a new solution from scratch which wouldn't be compatible with the present one.
There will come a time when SKY have no alternative but to redesign the whole platform .............
In my opinion, having network verification for multiroom solves 2 current problems with the phone line system:
1. Some people (like me) don't necessarily need or want to have a landline phone line. Having a phone line and paying for line rental just to have multiroom is a bloody expensive way of having another SKy box in the bedroom!
2. People don't want to run cables all around their house to connect boxes to phone lines. Yes, I understand there are wireless solutions, but most people don't see that. They see, "connect box to phone line? But sure my phone line is in X room and I want my box in Y room."
Insisting on Ethernet cable only solves one of those problems (the not having a phone line one, obviously) so IMO, I would find it quite odd if they insisted on it. That said, nothing to stop you going down the wireless bridge route and bluffing a wired connection.
I would personally use some form of USB key that plugs into the back of all the boxes, that talk to each other directly, and not through the normal network (so they have to be close enough to each other, ie, in the same house), and use some form of encryption so that the signal cannot be stolen and spoofed etc.
You're assuming Sky will be implementing an easily hacked Network solution, which would obviously work over any network type. But I would imagine it's not likely to be as crude as that? - which is why it's not been done so far, and why it's been in development for such a long time.
A fairly simple way is for the two boxes to find the MAC address of the router (this will be known to them both anyway) and make sure they are both the same - each box tells SKY who check if they are the same or multiroom box queries master and will not work unless they are both connected to the same network (not fool proof but quite good).
Many more.....
How would this stop the sharing of an additional box/boxes?
My laptop can pick up 4-6 different networks, so I'm assuming they can pick up mine, so technically you could have multiple boxes at different addresses running of one MAC address.
At least a hard wired connection has limitations, unless 2-3 adjoining neighbours are in on the scam.
From what I hear the system under test uses USB dongles and not the standard WiFi nor ethernet connections. This to me indicates that they are not using standard protocols, frequencies or encryption.
I have ordered multi room today but they say there is a small chance it won't be able to ge done because it is a communal dish. What's the exact reason, is there a max number of feeds from one dish or something ?
Sky said they won't know till the engineer comes out
Sorry is this meant in reply to my question about multi room in flat ?
Yes, the availability of multiroom is entirely dependent on how the flats are wired, and nothing to do with Sky - only the people responsible for the distribution system can tell you if it's possible and what it might cost (usually VERY expensive, if it's even possible). A Sky installer wouldn't be allowed to touch the system.
Why would they send someone out then I spoken to two sky agents if different occasions they did say there is a possibility it couldn't be done but nothing about sky not doing it touching expense etc.
What is the difference with a dish on a large house for example wired into many room's then them wanting it put in another room for example
You really should consult with your landlord/management committee to find out who is responsible for your system and ask them whether there are available outlets and if not the cost of installing them - certainly nothing to do with Sky, why would Sky know how the system is installed?
You've only spoken to Sky CS's, so they know about as much as the till operators in Tesco's
As davemurgatroyd has mentioned, they are COMPLETELY different things, and depending how it's been installed is unlikely to have any spare capacity to add more sockets (it wastes money fitting spare capacity that isn't used).
But as I mentioned previously, Sky can't touch it (and don't carry that kind of gear anyway), but it wouldn't be unusual to cost £100's to add an extra couple of sockets - it might need a considerable redesign, and extra equipment fitting, as well as existing equipment upgrading.
On the plus side, doing such an upgrade would make it easier and cheaper for others to add extra sockets
I still don't get that a sky installer must have procedures to follow, and if a tel. line is mandatory, he would install - otherwise he would be out of a job, particularly if Sky monitored tel. line connections to new installs!
As I suggested a LONG time back
A number of people do seem to 'fall through the net', there's always a chance you could be another.
If Sky do contact you, don't ignore it, get back to them and simply tell them the installer didn't connect the box to the phone, and that they are free to sent a competent installer out to do it properly, at your convenience, and at their cost.
Sky's own installers can authorise cards via a PDA, so a lazy installer can turn both cards on in that way and save himself the time and work doing it properly.